M/S Euro, Rep. By Its Proprietor v. Bank Of India,

[ 3303 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT.

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION NO:20434 OF 2012 Between:

M/s_ EURO, Rep. by its Proprietor, Ch. Subramanyant, S/o Sekharan, residing at 104, Alpine Towers, besides Viceroy Hotel, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad-S00 ...PETITIONER AND Bank of lndia, Rep. by its Asst. General Manager, Khairetabad Branch, Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENTS Petitiqn under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring thai the action of the Respondent in issuing a letter dt. 02-07-2012 bearing reference No.KHB-ACS-2012-1313011130, intimating the Petitioner that the photographs of the Petitioner and guarantor along with the loan particulars etc. will'bd published in the newspapers as arbitrary, illegal and without any authority of Law and consequently direct the Respondent to forbear from making such publication of the photographs of the Petitioners etc. l.A. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP. NO:26204OF 20121 t Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass interim orders directing the Respondent not to publish the photographs and also the details of defaulted loan accounts in newspapers as stated in the impugned

letter dated o2o7-2012 bearing reference No. KHB:ACS:2012-13/3011/30 pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. SAt SHARATH REp SRI M. NAGA RAGHU Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. T. VIDYA RANI The Court made the following: ORDER t

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO - Writ Petition No.20434 of 2OL2 '

ORDER:

When the matter is taken up for consideration, Mr.Sai Sharath, learned counsel representing Mr.M.Naga Raghu, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the writ petition, sole petitioner died and his legal heirs are not coming forward to prosecute the matter and expressed his inability.

2.

Smt.T.Vidya Rani, learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner,s loan was already closed on 18.10.2023 and the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

a J In view of the above submission, the Writ petition is closed. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/- L. LAKSHMI BABU A SI TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRl. M. NAGA RAGHU, Advocate [OPU

2. One CC to Ms. T. VIDYA RANI ,Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD Copies .. t BM GJP

I I HIGH COURT DATED:1 910212025 ( 1|l E S 14. 14.

2 t uu pgp5 t11 2- lr t) { F.t'.' .)/

ORDER

:

-,.

l-C t, WP.No.20434 of 2012 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS h